Monday, December 31, 2012

This blog was fairly busy this year, covering many topics. We had
190 posts this year. Many of the posts covered the 2012 election, particularly the 6th district congressional primary. Here are some of the best posts of 2012.

2012 was a busy year on campus, though more in terms of construction than politics. Planning for the new medical school continued to progress. The new Sangren Hall opened, along with an expanded Honors College and many road changes. There was only a little political news on campus.

2012 was a tough year for conservatives. There were few victories, and our nominal leaders, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, gave precious little to cheer for in defeat. The biggest conservative victory was Scott Walker's defeat of the recall attempt in Wisconsin. Human Events honored him for this this year, but this blog already did so last year.

Cruz united the national conservative movement behind his candidacy. He fended off the vile attacks from Dewhurst and won 57% in the runoff. Conservatives should expect big things from Cruz. He is this blog's conservative of the year.

Fenton said he believes his work on Pierangeli’s campaign may have been a factor in Getting's decision not to retain him, and possibly also that Fenton played a role in Getting’s dismissal by Gregart in 1998.

Getting’s personnel file from the prosecutor’s office contains two memorandums authored by Fenton in 1998 in which he told Gregart and then-Assistant Prosecutor Joe Skocelas of an incident, also witnessed by a Kalamazoo Township Police detective, in Fenton’s office during which Getting became “visibly hostile, and shortly after that he unleashed a verbal tirade that one had to witness to believe.”

“He started yelling loudly, using repeated profanity in the hallway near the copy machine and my office, whereby anyone within the back part of the office could easily hear him.” Fenton wrote. “He lost complete control of himself.

“The substance of the tantrum was not to bother asking his ‘F--- opinion if we were going to ‘F--- argue with him; that he didn’t have the ‘F--- time, etc … It was easily the most professionally embarrassing situation I have witnessed since joining this office.”

Said Fenton on Thursday: “Because of his conduct that occurred with me where he lost his temper and his explosive temper came out, he was fired.

Wait a minute. What was it that Getting said about his firing during the campaign?

Getting says his departure had nothing to do with job performance and stemmed from disagreements he and Gregart had “about the goals of the office, the people that were being brought into the office and what people’s roles should be.”

“I was challenging him and the way he was leading the office and that resulted in my political appointment being withdrawn,” Getting said.

So basically Getting is a big stinking liar. And now he's the most powerful person in Kalamazoo County.

Fenton also surmised that Getting's decision to jettison him and Pierangeli may stem from promises that Fenton said Getting made of “some position to some of the people that have been helping him on his campaign.”

“There were no current openings in our office, so he had to make some room for them,” Fenton said.

We will see if Getting appoints people with ties to his campaign or the local democrat party.

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

The argument for Right to Work in Michigan isn't complicated, but unions and democrats have been putting out lots of misinformation, trying to confuse people.

The case for Right to Work is simple. You should not be forced to join or pay dues to a union as a condition of employment. Unions claim to support workers, but they want to fire workers who refuse to give them money.

The second problem with this argument is that the union may not actually benefit the worker, or the benefit may not exceed the cost of membership. Under the unions' argument, THEY decide unilaterally that they benefit the worker, rather than the worker deciding for himself what benefits or does not benefit him.

Unions also argue that mandatory union dues are no different from taxes. But only government can collect taxes. Are unions claiming to be units of government? Effectively, that is what they are. In any case, this argument does not provide any reason not to eliminate these taxes, which is what Right to Work does.

Curiously, the left decries monopoly businesses, but is all for monopoly unions. But unions basically businesses that sell negotiation services and related products. They may not call themselves businesses, but they provide services in exchange for money, which is the essence of a business.

Coercive unions are actually worse than monopoly businesses, since they not only restrict competition, but also force people to buy their product on the penalty of losing their job. This coercive power makes them tempting targets for outside interests who seek to capture control of them for other purposes. In the heyday of communism, many unions were controlled by communists. Many unions have been controlled by organized crime. Some union bosses use the unions for their personal benefit. Many unions these days are controlled by left-wing activists who push politics unrelated to workers' interests. These interests push employers and politicians to provide benefits to themselves, rather than the workers. If workers sense that something is wrong in their union, they should be able to leave, not be forced to keep paying it money.

Thus workers should have nothing to fear from Right to Work. It not only benefits those workers who don't want to be part of unions, but it also benefits those workers who like and want to be members of unions. The people who don't benefit from Right to Work are union bosses who have to provide better, cheaper service to workers.

What economic effects should we expect from Right to Work? Without coercive unions making unreasonable demands and enforcing inflexible work rules, we would expect businesses to benefit. They would make larger profits, create more jobs, invent more new and better products, and ultimately expand the whole economy. Union bosses will certainly suffer, and some overpaid union workers may not do as well, but workers as a whole will benefit from more jobs, growing demand for labor, and more accountable unions.

First of all, there is nothing wrong with a "right to work for less". To the extent that unions do increase their members' wages, they do so by shutting out other workers who are willing to work for less. Why should some workers benefit by discriminating against other workers?

Economic statistics need to be interpreted carefully. Unions point out that states without Right to Work have higher wages than those with it. Now this cannot prove that Right to Work caused this gap, since there are numerous factors that affect wages. Indeed many southern (Right to Work) states have had higher poverty and more minorities before they had Right to Work.

In his most recent newsletter, Speaker Jase Bolger explains the issues surrounded the Governor's veto of concealed carry reform.

------------------------------------

Changes to Michigan's Concealed Carry Law Vetoed

Senate Bill 59 which was passed by the legislature was later vetoed by the Governor. The bill would have allowed Concealed Pistol License (CPL) holders who wished to take additional training the ability to carry a concealed weapon in the current Pistol Free Zones. It is currently legal to carry a weapon openly in those areas, however SB 59 would have eliminated open carry in those areas and allowed only concealed carry by specially trained license holders. Under the bill, an organization (like a school) wishing to remain gun free could declare itself so and post a notice of same; in that case licensed persons would not have violated gun laws but could have been asked to leave the premises and charged with trespassing if they refused. The same practice is in place today in many establishments.

According to the Governor's press release his veto was primarily based on what he feels is the bill’s failure to let designated public entities such as schools, day care centers and hospitals opt out of the new concealed carry provisions. He had urged that SB 59 be modified to more significantly restrict pistols in those zones by not only prohibiting open-carry in such places, but for allowing only concealed pistols to be carried if license holders receive additional training, subject to the right of the property owners to prohibit concealed carrying if they desire. Under the bill as passed, only private venues can opt out, as can college universities with constitutional autonomy.

Much of the debate surrounding this bill has come just as the horrific events of Newtown Connecticut unfolded last week. As the father of two children, I cannot begin to imagine the heartbreak and horror for those in Connecticut. The sad truth is that signing or vetoing Senate Bill 59 would have had no impact on that tragedy. With regard to this specific legislation, it is unfortunate a compromise was not reached that the governor could support, and I understand the governor exercising his authority. It also is unfortunate that this veto does not make Michigan citizens safer in gun-free zones. Neither the governor's approval nor his veto will stop evil from preying on innocent people. With this veto, however, open-carry still exists in schools, churches and other public areas, and we know that criminals do not respect gun-free zones. For these reasons, we will continue to work with the governor to best protect our law-abiding citizens' Second Amendment rights, as well as the safety and security of all of our citizens.

Sunday, December 23, 2012

Christmastime for conservative activists brings lots of spam emails from GOP
leaders in Michigan. These provide a curious sidebar in the "War on Christmas",
the leftist effort to eliminate traditional symbols of Christmas as part
of the broader culture war.

The chief symbol of the War on Christmas
is the battle between the greetings "Merry Christmas" and "Happy Holidays", with
"Season's Greetings" making an occasional appearance. Of course, there wouldn't
be "Holidays" without Christmas. The bizarre argument for using "Happy Holidays"
is that some tiny fraction of the population would be offended by "Merry
Christmas", so we must use a phrase that annoys far more people. (But they're
the wrong people, so who cares are them?)

Two recent polls have shown
that 69% and 77% of Americans prefer "Merry Christmas". The percentages of
Republicans was 88% yet another
poll.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/content/pdf/7006
http://www.goppolk.org/?p=1131

Yet
some Republican leaders have taken a cowardly stand with the forces of political
correctness rather than the vast majority of the Republican base.

Here is this year's list. Local Republicans seem to have gotten the message, unlike statewide Republicans.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

After the terrible shooting in Connecticut, the left immediately exploited the massacre to call for gun control. They see every crime as an excuse to punish responsible gun owners and take away freedom. Of course, the school already banned guns, and murder is illegal everywhere, but laws didn't stop the shooter.

There are lots of problems in the world with no good solutions, but this isn't one of them. There is a simple policy change that could be implemented tomorrow that would nearly eliminate mass shootings. It wouldn't cost any money and it wouldn't take away anyone's freedom.

The answer is to eliminate "gun free zones" and allow citizens to carry everywhere, without fear of prosecution. John Lott reports the startling fact on mass killings:

I'm just saying, you look around the world, at some point if it's just
randomness, you know, and - you know, you would expect to see more than zero,
right, in these cases, and the United States has only one case since 1950 where
one of these multiple-victim public shootings, where more than three people have
been killed, that's occurred in a place where guns were allowed.

There are two simple reasons for this. One is that shooters pick locations where they can kill the most people, which means places where people are defenseless. For example,

And I'll give you a simple example from this year. I
mean any of the ones you point to from this year or past years are going to
follow that, but look at the Colorado shooting that the governor is going to be
coming on to talk about. You had seven movie theaters showing the Batman movie
within a 20-minute drive of the killer's apartment.

Only one of those seven movie theaters posted a ban
on concealed handguns. The killer didn't go to the movie theater that was
closest to his home. There was one that was only 1.3 miles away. He didn't go to
the largest one. In fact, one advertises itself quite openly as having the
largest auditorium in the state of Colorado.

And you'd think if you wanted to go to one that
would kill a lot of people, he'd go to the largest one on premiere night for the
Batman movie. Instead, the one he went to was the only one that banned concealed
handguns. And that happens time after time.

The second reason is that people who do try to commit mass shootings in locations that allow guns get shot or captured by citizens with guns.

Unfortunately, many people never learn no matter how much evidence there is. Most states used to be "gun free zones" outside private property. Many of these states have passed laws allowing concealed carry. In every case, anti-gun folks howled about blood in the streets, but crime went down. When the Supreme Court overturned Washington DC's gun ban, crime went down. When Britain and Australia banned guns, crime went way up.

Israel has armed teachers and they eliminated terrorist shootings at schools. Utah has allowed concealed carry in schools for years with no problems.

I laid out the same basic facts in 2007 after the Virginia Tech shooting.

If gun control zealots had any respect for facts, they would have discovered this long ago, because there have been too many factual studies over the years to leave any serious doubt about gun control laws being not merely futile but counterproductive.

The invincibly ignorant include Governor Snyder, who vetoed a bill that would have allowed people with concealed weapons permits to carry in previously prohibited locations if they received extra training.

"I am excited about the opportunity to lead Kalamazoo County Republicans," Worthams said in a statement. "We have a chance to build our party and make it competitive in the 2014 elections. We will show our friends and our neighbors how important it is to elect candidates who will be good fiscal stewards of our community so that everyone can have a strong qualify of life and be able to make the American Dream come true."

Melanie Kurdys of Portage was elected vice-chairperson, Stan Runyon of Portage was elected treasurer and ... was elected secretary. The appointments are for two year terms.

Coleman Lutz submitted a letter of resignation citing "unforeseeable circumstances" in his first month of service as an Oshtemo Township trustee. The board accepted his resignation at its Tuesday meeting.

Were the "unforeseeable circumstances" that he got elected by straight-ticket democrat voters despite having absolutely no campaign?

The board appointed former longtime trustee Dave Bushouse, who was defeated last month, to fill the vacancy. There will be a special election in 2014.

Thursday, December 13, 2012

The amended version of HB 5225 has many incremental improvements for which gun owners across the state will benefit, including:

Streamlining private sales to allow people to apply for a purchase license at any law enforcement agency rather than those in the city or county of their residence

Repealing the prerequisite handgun safety test currently required to obtain a purchase license

Extending the time that a purchase license for private transfers is valid from ten days to thirty days

Repealing the requirement that local law enforcement agencies maintain paper copies of purchase licenses

So the state police, with the support of the governor, succeeded in cutting the heart out of this bill. That is, to repeal the licencing and registration of handguns in Michigan. This is similar to what happened in 2008, when the bill was stripped to only repeal the phony "safety inspection" requirement. This issue needs to be hammered until the full bill finally passes.

For years now, the county elites have been trying to raise taxes to fund a county bus system. The Kalamazoo County Transportation Authority (KCTA) was established by the county commission with the power to put tax hikes on the ballot (conveniently shielding commissioners from having to vote for them).

This blog first covered the issue in May 2006, laying out the problems with government bus systems. The tax hikers succeeded in convincing 53.4% of county voters to pass a countywide tax by focusing on the Car-a-van (now Metro Connect) service for disabled people. In 2007, Western cut two bus routes, but when students complained, Western privatized the routes and saved 25%. The 2006 tax hike was intended to transition to a permanent countywide bus system, but in 2008, voters rejected the tax, with 58% opposed.

After this setback, the tax-hikers had to come up with a new plan. They went back to the city of Kalamazoo, which never met a tax it didn't like, to fund the bus system. An extension of the Car-a-van program was passed countywide in 2009.

The tax-hikers convinced local legislators to pass a bill allowing an authority to cover part of the county, rather than all. The idea was to focus on the areas that actually use bus service, though many people in the proposed district still live miles from the nearest bus stop. Presumably they also want the largest district they can get that will pass their tax hikes. So far as this blog knows, the new district has not been finalized.

This time, the bus-taxers are putting a tax proposal, possibly an increase, on the ballot in May 2013. This appears to be a renewal of the Car-a-van tax, although the article isn't clear on this.

Over the past few years, Texas Township was divided between Supervisor Dave Healy and the other six members of the township board. In the August primary, voters delivered a mixed verdict, voting out Healy and three of the board members critical of him.

It seems that the rift has not healed now that the new board has taken office.

Trustee Trish Roberts, who voted against the cost-of-living increase along with trustees Jeff Vander Roest and Wendy Mazer, questioned the cost to the township of the raises and requested more information on actual compensation, employee evaluations and what private companies are doing.

The Michigan House and Senate passed Right to Work bills on Thursday. The bills were very quickly introduced and passed, but there was obviously a lot of work and planning behind the scenes to make it happen.

Pressure has been building for right to work for a while. Six years ago, it was only discussed in active conservative circles. In 2008, house dems held a vote to ambush Republicans. Republicans in safe districts voted for it, while the others voted against. Following the Republican sweep in 2010, activists pushed the issue within the Republican party, and support for Right to Work became the default GOP position.

Rick Snyder dodged the issue, saying it was "not on his agenda". I can't really blame him for not wanting a big Wisconsin-style fight disrupting his other priorities. But pressure continued to build and issue continued to be discussed, even as bills had not been introduced.

The key factor was likely Proposal 2, where the unions disastrously overreached in their attempt to hijack the Michigan Constitution. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce spent a lot of money defeating it. The key to passing Right to Work has never been the legislature, it has been whether the Chamber was willing to put up the money to defend it on the ballot. With the recent news that Dick DeVos and Ron Weiser, key GOP funders, were advocating for it, the answer now is yes.

The bill still has to be passed again, probably on Tuesday. Unions have been engaged in their usual tricks of being as obnoxious as possible, yelling, storming meetings, and threatening violence. Do they really think this works? Old habits are hard to break, I guess.

Keep in mind that legislative leaders will often let members in tough districts defect when their votes are not needed. The six reps are all in union-heavy areas (Downriver, Macomb, Macomb, Saginaw, Monroe, UP). Horn is term-limited and likely running for state senate in 2014; the others were all elected to their second terms last month.

Casperson (UP) has a tough district and Green's (Bay, Huron, Lapeer) is somewhat tough, but he is also the leading gun rights advocate in the senate. Similar excuses don't hold for Rocca (Macomb) and especially Nofs (Calhoun), both of whom saw significant improvements to their districts. Rocca and Nofs both deserve to be primaried. Leon Drolet should run against Rocca. There isn't an obvious challenger for Nofs, but maybe Dick DeVos and Justin Amash could find someone.

Assuming the bill is finally passed, Governor Snyder has indicated he will sign it. Unions will file lawsuits, which are not likely to go anywhere. They will probably try to recall members of the legislature, and may succeed in a few cases, but not enough to change control in Lansing.

They will also put the issue on the ballot. The bills include appropriations to make them referendum-proof (though this will probably be challenged). The unions can and will put either an initiative or constitutional amendment on the ballot. The reason for avoiding a referendum is that a referendum would require voters to vote yes to affirm Right to Work, while an initiative would require voters to vote yes to block it. Undecided voters usually vote no, so that side has an advantage.

The battle is just beginning, but Michigan becoming a Right to Work state is finally in sight.